If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ. You may have to Log In (see link at the top right) or register (free)
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. You need to provide a valid email, but don't use a Yahoo, Hotmail, or AOL, since they tend to reject foreskin-related traffic.
To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Belgian urologist speaks out on national TV against circumcision

03-14-2019, 02:54 PM

A few days ago, one of the most famous urologists in Belgium spoke out on the news against infant circumcision when being interviewed about his book on the penis that is to appear shortly. He explained and illustrated what happens during circumcision and clearly stated how much skin is removed and how that irreversibly removes nerve endings and also results in reduced glans sensitivity. He also outlined that this can severely alter sexuality and that it can cause many sexual problems. He also mentioned that penile medical problems are more frequent in circumcised men than in uncircumcised men. He didn’t go as far as suggesting a ban on infant circumcision, but I believe this is mainly due to political correctness.

I was very glad to finally hear somebody making such strong statement on the subject as it is rarely debated in Belgium. At the same time, it’s an extra stimulus for me to continue working on my e-book on circumcision and foreskin restoration, which is also intended to spark the debate and maybe even to change policies. The book that will appear in a couple of days is about the penis and not strictly about the foreskin and circumcision. It’s apparently intended as a kind of “manual” to make people more aware of the penile functions and myths that do exist about it. I’m very curious to start reading as soon as my copy arrives. Based on his scientific publications I was aware that he is opposed to infant circumcision, but it was nice to see that appear in all media. I also contacted him long time back about restoring and to discuss the possibility to publish a paper or book on the latter, but unfortunately I never got an answer. Maybe I’ll try again after I read the book.

I’ll post more about the book if I come across more interesting things in there. For those interested in some of his work, you can search for Piet Hoebeke, a professor at Ghent University.

There’s no better feeling in the world than the warm embrace of your foreskin, so KOT!

A few days ago, the book from this urologist arrived and I immediately read it. The book is entitled "The penis" and a subtitle "facts and tips for daily usage".

I'd summarize is as a "popular science" book, explaining a lot of things about the penis that are not generally well-known. I must say I learnt quite a few things from it, but I won't go and mention all of those.

Obviously I was mainly interested in the chapter on the foreskin and circumcision, as that was also what he brought up in the interview on the TV news a few weeks ago when the book was announced. In this chapter, he speaks out against infant circumcision and points out how much sensitive tissue and nerve endings are removed. So far, I was totally agreeing with everything I read, but then came some surprises...

First surprise was to read that the author got circumcised at 24 and appears to be very happy about it. He does however not elaborate on it at all, as I guess he didn't want to make it too much of a personal story. On the other hand, in other parts of the book he tells about how his views as a surgeon changed over time, as he often treats people that want to change sex or that are born with gender-unclarity (e.g. having internal female sexual organs but externally having a penis and scrotum). He also explained how before they would often fulfill the parental request in such cases, while now he often advises to wait until the person is old enough to make a decision on what gender suits him/her best. He's taking the same approach on non-medically required circumcisions and often tries to talk people out of it.

The second big surprise was there when it concerns foreskin restoration. Given how he advocates actively against infant circumcision and the consequences in terms of sensitivity, I expected that there would also be a major section on foreskin restoration. It turned out to be two paragraphs, one on surgical restoration and one about non-surgical restoration where he pretty much claims that it does not work. Below is a translation of what he wrote on the matter:

"Reversing circumcision is impossible anyhow - irrespective of the success of the surgery. It's a question I get more and more often, but where I unfortunately have to disappoint all those men. The ancient Greeks had found some solution for this. Doctors used to detach the skin at the base of the penis and shifted it up to cover the glans. On the naked shaft scar tissue would be formed subsequently. In a more recent implementation doctors would cover the wound with a flap of skin from elsewhere on the body, but also that method excelled in uglyness. The practice is not in use an more, luckily. A covered glans cannot justify mutilating the rest of the penis.

What does exist nowadays are different kinds of devices to stretch the remainder of the foreskin. Some people attach weights to them. This works, but only as long as you keep on doing it. When you keep at it for a very long time, until the age that your skin looses its elasticity, you might be able to notice a permanent but small difference. A completely new foreskin is not an option - at least for now. With modern techniques we might be able to culture tissue from stem cells and try to shape them in the desired form factor. This opens perspectives to magically generate a foreskin using a 3D printer. Such solution is nothing for the foreseeable future, and even if it would be possible one day, organs such as a liver or kidneys would get priority at that point. A foreskin is a little bit less essential for survival."

As you can imagine, I agree with the first paragraph about the surgical options, but on the second one it's quite obvious that he's not aware of what many of us have experienced over the years. I've contacted the author to point out that the non-surgical methods in fact do work, even if they're slow. I also mentioned that I'm in that process and that I'm planning to publish an e-book on it later this year, and that I was willing to meet and discuss about the subject. I didn't really know what answer I would get, as I already contacted him over a year ago (after reading one of his research papers indicating how there is sensitivity loss after circumcision), but never got a reply. This time, he did get back to me just a few hours after I e-mailed, and he asked his secretary to book a meeting for us to discuss the matter in more detail. That meeting is now scheduled for the beginning of June so I'm looking forward to enlighten him about non-surgical restoration. Obviously I don't know how the meeting will go, but I'm happy that at least he's willing to have a meeting and exchange thoughts. I'll definitely post an update on how it went, but due to both of our agendas being quite full, it will be only in 2 months from now.

There’s no better feeling in the world than the warm embrace of your foreskin, so KOT!